Does anyone know if the 5.x transition will fixed the NAT bouncing issues?
This is absolutely annoying as hell. In fact, if anyone has a way to
resolve this issue on the current v1.0 or v1.1 build, I will pay $100 US.
--Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Buechler [mailto:cbuechler at gmail dot com]
Sent: Monday, September 06, 2004 11:17 PM
To: Michael Joy
Cc: m0n0wall dash dev at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
Subject: Re: [m0n0wall-dev] AMD Opteron Router
This aroused my curiousity. I don't have an Opteron to test on,
unfortunately. I did some Google searching to see what I could find
out about FreeBSD on AMD64. The problem is I don't believe there is
any 64 bit AMD64 support in FreeBSD 4.x, only 5.x, and m0n0wall is
currently based on 4.x with no plans to move to 5.x until it's
considered and proves to be stable.
I would test the standard m0n0wall build as you're currently doing and
see how that performs. On such a fast box, it could very well push
gigE at wire speed without a special build. :)
Otherwise, I would anticipate m0n0wall going to 5.x within the next
several months, as FreeBSD is nearing the 5.3 release which will be
the first 5-STABLE release. (note I'm not an official member of this
project, and am only deducing by what Manuel has said in some of his
past posts to the lists)
I'm also certainly interested in any benchmarks you can provide.
-Chris
On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 19:19:33 -0500, Michael Joy <mdjoy at phy dot olemiss dot edu>
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm curious as to what would be required to setup a dev box and recompile
> the PC version for an AMD64 platform? Currently I'm working on a testbed
> Opteron server box (1U) with built in dual gigabit Ethernet (which is the
> quite well supported dual port broadcom chip), and a 10/100 intel nic for
> management built in. The board also has a built in ati rage xl 8mb chip.
The
> box booted v1.1 without event from the cdrom and is running now in our
test
> environment.
>
> The project requires a bit of beef as the router will be serving a Grid
> Computing farm and internet2. Under normal circumstances I (ie read
> corporation) I might go out and buy a big fat cisco box, but for high
energy
> physics research, this project seemed a worthy thing to invest some time
in.
>
> So, I'm curious as to what it'd take to compile a processor specific
version
> to get some added optimizations in. Also, in the future it would be nice
if
> the base FreeBSD OS was updated to be current to support all the nice AMD
> Opteron Numa features etc.
>
> Oddly enough, v1.1 booted on a dual opteron 2.2 gigahertz with 2048 mb in
a
> numa config, (1024 mb of ram in two 512 mb registered ecc low latency
> corsair modules per processor), without a hitch. Of that, I am quite
> excited!
>
> Anyways, we're going to be doing some high end hardware benching to see
what
> we can really stream through one of these puppies. If anyone has worked on
> compiling the project for say i686 or athlon, please let me know. P.S.
dual
> processor support would be nice, but we're probably going to go with a
> single processor box as dual seems REALLY overkill. As if an Opteron
wasn't
> already overkill :-)
>
> Thanks,
>
> Michael D. Joy
>
> University of Mississippi - High Energy Physics
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: m0n0wall dash dev dash unsubscribe at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
For additional commands, e-mail: m0n0wall dash dev dash help at lists dot m0n0 dot ch